Welcome to Kioumars Sepehri’s Official Website

Senior Advocate, Master of Law, Official Judicial Expert

In The Name Of God

Slander of the judiciary and the judge of the case

By: Kioumars Sepehri

Due to the nature of its work, the judiciary generally has dissatisfied and complaining clients. The general public is dissatisfied with it, especially those who vote against them. Some of these people accuse the judge of all kinds of slanders and violations in order to satisfy their mentality. The issuer of the judgment and other members of the court shall attribute an unhealthy atmosphere to them without citing the words and claims of such persons, and sometimes the actions of fraudsters and watery arguments will intensify the case, for example, by taking money from one of the parties who has been condemned, claiming to pay it to someone else. However, in their minds, it is a definite act in their minds and attributes everything to the judiciary. Of course, such people will certainly follow the same procedure regarding the relatives of the judiciary. Let's defend the dignity of justice and others and not let the faces of good people be distorted in our minds for no reason, because maintaining the sanctity and grandeur of justice means maintaining order and The law and the dignity of individuals, and certainly those who do not respect the dignity of the judiciary, will not respect the dignity of lawyers, experts, and others. Let's not generalize the wrongdoing of one person to the whole judiciary and let's not waste the honest and responsible efforts of the judges and the correct staff. Dealing fairly and realistically with issues and avoiding looking at issues emotionally solves many problems. Keep in mind that these issues usually arise when people think that a mistake has been made in the decision-making process or that there has been an intentional decision in this type of decision-making (which, in the opinion of the beneficiary, is unfair). Now, have we imagined that everyone? Is it possible to make a mistake in any position? Have we really examined all aspects and cases of the case in it in a biased manner? We were the judges of the case and we understood and felt both sides with their reasons and documents, as it really is, how did we judge? Isn't it better to explain the special issues and problems of judgment impartially to the client in a professional and simple language, and to explain the nature and manner of judging and the difficulties and judgments of the judge in terms of observing impartiality and the need to pay attention to the reasons and evidence? In terms of enforcing the relevant laws, we must remember the specific problems of the case, which are based on the actions of the dissatisfied party and those related to his non-expertise, and correct his misconceptions and maintain the dignity of judgment and justice in our firm and firm words. It will also preserve the value of the power of attorney, because the judge and the judge and the judgment of scorn, certainly an attorney or attorney will do the same action as appropriate situations. It seems that people are getting more and more from the facts and problems If they are aware of the complexities of the work of the judiciary, they will be more willing to pursue their affairs through technicians. Therefore, it is in everyone's interest because both the people have become more aware and have seen a positive vision and mind, and we have recognized the sanctity and value of advocacy and judgment. Of course, there is also the expectation from colleagues and lawyers and employees of the judiciary that many of them will certainly do so. For example, in the event that a certain official ignores the fundamental rights of one party, while maintaining the dignity of the judiciary, he can be reminded of the rights of the rightful owner to choose the right way and respect the dignity of the judiciary to justify one's illegal actions. It is not, and the critique of constructive criticism in its time and place will be valuable, desirable, useful, and effective, and the present discussion is not in the position of denying it.

In order to justify our failure in the case (of course, failure, according to some people, because a lawyer who has done his job properly, the result is not a failure even if it is to the detriment of his client), like some people, we are unaware of the facts and only a few points. Seeing ourselves as positive, without imagining our problems in our minds, we try to judge impartially at all times and practice judging fairly in our minds and apply it throughout our lives, even when we are one side of the issue.